Table 3.
Item-level usability of computerized simulations (N = 22)
| Questions about your experience with the simulations | Brief MI with Gabe Turner (mean, SD) or % |
Introducing CBT with Tanisha Mosley (mean, SD) or % |
CBT functional analysis with Roger Ellison (mean, SD) or % |
|---|---|---|---|
| How engaging was the simulated client? | 2.23 (0.61) | 2.31 (0.57) | 2.45 (0.60) |
| How realistic was the simulated client? | 2.45 (0.67) | 2.36 (0.58) | 2.32 (0.72) |
| How much did you want to try it again? | 2.32 (0.65) | 2.23 (0.75) | 2.14 (0.89) |
| How likely are you to recommend the simulation? | 2.55 (0.60) | 2.68 (0.48) | 2.55 (0.60) |
| Did you use the help coach? (% yes) | 90.9% | 90.9% | 90.9% |
| How helpful was the coach? | 2.14 (0.91) | 2.45 (0.69) | 2.35 (0.75) |
| Did you use the scores? (% yes) | 90.9% | 100% | 90.9% |
| How helpful were the scores? | 2.19 (0.75) | 2.50 (0.52) | 2.30 (0.80) |
| Did you read the eLearning? (% yes) | 68.2% | 68.2% | 72.7% |
| How helpful was the eLearning? | 2.27 (0.70) | 1.93 (0.80) | 2.13 (0.72) |
| Did you use the speech recognition? (% yes) | 36.4% | 31.8% | 36.4% |
| How helpful was the speech recognition? | 2.13 (0.83) | 2.29 (0.76) | 2.13 (0.83) |
The item level scales ranged from 0 = ‘not at all,’ 1 = ‘minimally,’ 2 = ‘somewhat,’ 3 = ‘very‘'